An additional concern here is the difference between "intention" and
"impact". I may INTEND to convey to you my principles (which are based on
years of experience, reading, conversation, and thought). But if my IMPACT
on you is that I am closed-minded, then I am unlikely to accomplish my goal
of communicating with you my principles.

This is a two-sided street. The listener is totally responsible for my
impact on them...it is, after all, their construction. But if I want to be
effective in communicating with them, then I can't hide behind, "That's not
what I intended." I have to check out the impact I am having and adjust my
communication accordingly; or give up and choose not to communicate
effectively with that person.

~Alan

----- Original Message -----
From: Joe Jackson <shoeless@jazztbone.com>
> One way of saying that someone "believes in and sticks to principles they
> have discovered and tested through their life experiences" is saying that
> they are "closed-minded".
>
> Not useful. The issue of class offerings has been discussed three
trillion
> times by people interested in the Sudbury Model over the last thirty
years;
> for someone to discover that folks have some fairly firm opinions about
them
> and subsequently label that as "closed-minded" attempts to negate the life
> experiences and resulting found principles of "Sudbury minds" and any
other
> kind of mind.